Measures

42 technology, and also utilizing our own network of contacts within the mentioned industries. In order to get a large sample size, we reached out to many of the respondents through LinkedIn, which meant that we were able to see what industry they belonged to, and what type of position they held within said company. Furthermore, we also asked the respondents to come up with additional respondents that fit within our requirements.

5.3 Measures

The research model presented in this thesis (chapter 4.1) contains six constructs, that all have measurement items that are well founded in information-system research. From Saunders et al.

(2016) this operationalization is known as “the translation of concepts into tangible indicators of their existence” (Saunders et al., 2016;722). In the following chapter, this thesis will provide the constructs with measurable statements, and present the underlying sources. The term

“Blockchain technology” will be utilized in the measurements as a result of its widespread application in the field (Nakamoto, 2008).

Concerning the individual factors, the measures for perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness were taken from Nysveen et al.’s (2005) adaptation of Davis et al.’s (1989) original items. Venkatesh & Davis (2000) was also used as background for the measurement adoption regarding perceived ease of use. To our knowledge there are no research on Blockchain

technology that we can utilize to formulate and operationalize measures from. As a consequence, the term “Blockchain technology” will replace the “system” in the measures.

Perceived ease of use

PEoU1: Learning to use Blockchain technology is easy to me

PEoU2: It is easy to make Blockchain technology do what I want it to do PEoU3: It is easy to use Blockchain technology

PEoU4: Interacting with Blockchain technology does not require a lot of my mental effort

43 Perceived usefulness

PU1: Using Blockchain technology makes me save time PU2: Using Blockchain technology improves my efficiency PU3: Blockchain technology is useful to me

PU4: Using Blockchain technology in my job would enable me to accomplish tasks more quickly

The social factor, subjective norm ‘s, measure is also taken from Nysveen et al. (2005). The term normative pressures are utilized in this paper, but is also defined as social influences in the same paper. The three measurements are almost identical to the items used in Bhattacherjee (2000). As with the individual factors, the mentioned service is replaced by ”Blockchain technology” to measure the correct technology.

Subjective norm

SN1: People important to me think I should use Blockchain technology SN2: It is expected that people like me use Blockchain technology SN3: People I look up to expect me to use Blockchain technology

The two organizational factors have primarily been adopted from Qian et al. (2016).

The measurements from management support, where item number 1, 2 and 4 is measured, is taken from Qian et al.’s, (2016) measurements of top management support. Furthermore, item number 3 is adopted from item number 1 in Igbaria et al. (1997) measuring management support.

To clearly state that the measured management support is from the respondents own organization, the wording “… in my organization” has been added.

As for the measurements regarding competitive environment, Qian et al.’s, (2016) measures of competitive pressure has been utilized.

As in the individual and social factors, “Blockchain technology” has been added instead of the service measured in the mentioned sources regarding the two organizational factors.

44 Competitive environment

CE1: Our competitors are adopting Blockchain technology which gives our company pressure to adopt it too as they can perform their tasks efficiently by adopting it

CE2: Our key competitors get many advantages through adopting Blockchain technology CE3: We are aware of our competitors who have adopted Blockchain technology which is perceived favorably by others in our industry

CE4: Many of our competitors are going to adopt Blockchain technology in the near future

Management support

MS1: Top management in my organization deems Blockchain technology to be essential in the operations of the company

MS2: The decision of top management in my organization is vital for the company to adopt Blockchain technology

MS3: Management in my organization is aware of the benefits that can be achieved with the use of Blockchain technology

MS4: Top management in my organization will support Blockchain technology adoption

To measure intention, this thesis has adopted the measurements from Giovanis et al.’s (2012) behavioral intentions, whose measurements is adapted from Davis (1989). The term “Blockchain technology” has replaced “Internet banking” from Giovanis et al. (2012) in this thesis.

Intention

I1: I intend to use Blockchain technology in the near future I2: I plan to use Blockchain technology

I3: I expect to use Blockchain technology in the near future

In addition to the mentioned six constructs, the questionnaire included control variables related to knowledge and experience, and age, gender, industry and position as demographic

measurements.

45 The control variables are included as constants to assess the relationship between the other constructs in the survey. The question related to both knowledge and experience is adopted from the measurements from Nysveen & Pedersen (2004). Both constructs are based on the experience statement, and adopted to measure Blockchain technology knowledge and experience. There is one item per measurement. As a result, we have a case of mono-operation bias that could lead to the item’s failure to capture the entirety of the measurement (Nysveen, 1999). This needs to be taken into consideration, but as other studies have overcome this challenge, we will continue with the mentioned items.

Experience

1: I feel that I am an experienced user of Blockchain technology

Knowledge

1: I feel that I have in-depth knowledge of Blockchain technology

The demographic measurements were added to the model to avoid confounding results due to specific individual characteristics and to provide the data with depth. The measurements regarding industry are taken from the 2.2 chapter on different categories of corporations who could utilize Blockchain technology. There are countless use cases towards Blockchain technology, thus we included the industry category “other”. The measurement in regard to position is added from a standard hierarchy in consulting, banking and the other main industries measured in this study.

5.3.1 Measuring scale

With the exception of the four demographic measurements, all of the six constructs and the two control variables are measured using statements on a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. This scale is commonly utilized in adoption studies, similar to the studies our measurements and items are adopted from, and measures to which degree the respondents agree or disagree to the different statements.

46

5.3.2 Layout

As we wanted to increase the amount of responses, the model and corresponding survey (Appendix G), was created with this in mind. As a consequence the 28 questions reflected a pretty concise and time effective survey. The questionnaire layout and order of questions should be logical, which will benefit the survey and the results (Saunders et al., 2016).

The questionnaire is mainly presented in a matrix form, and consists of different grids related to the different measurements and the number of related items. This makes it possible for the respondent to answer similar types of questions quickly and at the same time (Saunders et al., 2016).

At the start of the survey, a brief introduction regarding Blockchain Technology was added together with general information about the process. The general information provided the respondents with information regarding anonymity, the number of questions, the usage of the responses, that there is no wrong answer, that the entire scale can be utilized and that the survey is voluntary and could be stopped at any time. The Blockchain technology introduction was included to provide the respondents with some general information about the technology, and so that all the respondents had a clear understanding of which technology that the survey measured.

5.3.3 Pilot test

To be able to test the survey before distribution, we completed a small pilot test. We decided to conduct such a test after the completion of the survey to be able to avoid distributing a survey containing errors or misinterpretations (Saunders et al., 2016). The pilot test was completed by three individuals, which did not participate in the general survey. They were able to confirm that our measurements and constructs where understandable and possible to answer. In addition, we wanted to check if the layout was user-friendly, and that the distribution mechanisms in Qualtrics worked properly. As a consequence, we did not alter our survey after the pilot test. The

participants of the pilot test used on average about 4 minutes to complete the survey.

47